Ear 834P and Dynavector p-75

I need a new phono pre. and would like to know if any has compared the 2. The p-75 is newer and has more adjustments. I have a Scout TT with a ORTOFON/KONTRAPUNKT B.


Tim, I have an EAR 834 P on order.

How about you buy the Dynavector and we trade after a week? Sure would let us both know how they sound :^).
I think it takes longer to breakin. My 2-channel system had the 834p in it for a while,and then I decided to downsize to one system. I will be near Musicdirect today and if I walk in the place I know I will leave with something. Maybe I will take you up on the offer. Post you thoughts on the Ear 834p.

I never tried p-75, but 834P is a very good match for Kontrapunkt B as long as you are not using EARs step-up.
I have compared the two. Very, very different sounds, both worthwhile. The EAR sounds big, lush, very beautiful through the midrange but lacks extension up top. The Dyna is definitely not tube-like but is quite excellent in its way and is a superb value. Lots of settings to play with, and you will need to play with them to see what works best.

MD offers 30-day return on gear, so you might take that route. Dyna needs plenty of break in. The Granite Audio phono burn-in CD is pricey but very helpful for these situations.
for low output carts, which i believe yours is, the p-75 is amazing. i currently am running it with my scout/glider l2 combo with terrific results.

if you would like to read up a bit more on it, check out this months hi-fi+ for a rave review.

The EAR834p you compared was that a "stock" version, or was it modified/upgraded in any way?

I am also considering one of these two phono amps for purchse. Wonder if the treble extension could be improved with some tube rolling.

Thanks for any further information.
It was the upgraded, chrome unit and I believe it had also been modified and had different tubes in it, but I don't recall the specifics.
I picked up the P-75 and had a little time with it. So far It sounds very good. I do feel that maybe they should put it in a bigger box with some weights. My remote is bigger than the P-75. Many adjustments to play with. I think the P-75 has less surface noise than the EAR 834p. This may be becouse of the adjustable loading. This will take some time to play with.


Can you give us an idea what hifi+ said about the p75?

the reviewer basically was taken by it's transparency and it's no frills approach, not only physically but sonic wise. he was so taken by the performance of the phono enhancer that he indicated that he would be using the p-75 instead of his dynavector head amp that costs several times more.

i'd recommend that if you're interested in the p-75, you hit a newstand and read this review.
Thank you sberger. I'd love to get a hold of a copy but i dont think its being sold here in our country. Cheers.
What country is that? You can find hifi+ in the US if that's where you live.
Drubin, would you please elaborate on your experience with the P-75? how long did it burn in? did you use it in "phono enhanced" mode, and with what cartridge? thanks in advance!
I use it with a Benz L2. Have tried every mode and setting and I think the enhanced is the most interesting, but I'm not convinced it is an ideal match to this cart. I burned it in a lot and I suppose it made a difference. I'm always a little distrustful of my experience getting used to new components.
IMO, the major difference between high performance phonostages and lesser devices centers around their ability to communicate, articulate and inform without betraying an electronic presence.
With those properties in mind,in my system, the P-75 has been very comfortable being compared against a number of MC phono preamplifiers in the $1000-1500 retail price range. I suspect that the Dynavector P-75 is capable enuf to be revealing the character of the given system context moreso than betrayings its own particular limitations, which are suprisingly few and forgivable.
I'd describe it as highly detailed and slightly forward in presentation but not in your face.It's tonally colorful but it stays in the "neutral" camp rather than euphonic.Compared to the very best phonostages, its presentation would be considered be a bit light in the bass regions, giving the overall presentation a slightly lean quality tho that bass is very articulate and tuneful. It's primary strength appears to be in getting out of the way ,with an excellent sense of dynamics, pace and timing and is quite lucid & expressive with fine clarity and decent ambience.
In side by side comparison over nearly 3 months of evaluation *in my own systems*, I've preferred the P-75 to my own Roksan ArtaXerxes X /DSU as well as the EAR 834, Naim Stageline,47 Labs Shigaraki Phono, Benz Lucaschek, Lehmann Black Cube and Monolithic PS1/HC1 and have felt it to be roughly comparable in overall performance and often bettering in specific(sometimes personally critical) qualities, the Linn Linto, Exposure XIII, Roksan Caspian Reference,Tom Evans Microgroove, and Audiomat Phono 1.

1) it seems to be very sensitive to the interconnect between it and the preamp,apparently preferring simple stranded copper IC's (like Linn, Naim, Exposure, Cabletalk, etc.)to the more exotic geometries and the best interconnect I've tried to date with it has been Wally Malewicz' "Wallywires".Fortunately, the IC's it prefers are all relatively cheap.So far,most exotic hi-res cables have resulted in a hyperdetailed presentation and undermined the musicality and warmth.
2) In PE mode, there seems to be a link to working best with MC cartridges having a high internal impedance.The cartridges that I've preferred to use in PE mode have all had internal impedances exceeding 16 ohms.
3) It took forever to settle in- While it sounded okay with the initial installation, I still heard subtle improvements after a full month installed in the system and switching modes from standard MC to PE mode added a few weeks more.
I am located in the Philippines :-)